Click to See Complete Forum and Search --> : Non-computer devices at wireless hotspots


Simon_Mackay
04-04-2005, 10:18 PM
Hi all!

Will there be a standard to permit one to authenticate Wi-Fi non-computer devices like VoWLAN phones, WiPICS wireless digital-camera links and the like (which don't have Web browsers) into commercial hotspots?

As we have seen through the WiFi Planet news, there is a trickle of non-computer devices that can become member of WiFi networks but this will become a flood as more manufacturers of these devices consider building in support for the family of IEEE 802.11 standards in these devices. It also includes use of WiFi technologies for automotive applications where, for example, one could pull in "Podcasted" content from a server computer i.e. a laptop; bring in and play Internet radio streams via their car-audio system, or update satellite navigation information in their vehicle using the WiFi hotspot they are parked outside.

The local hotspot or hotzone WiFi LAN could then be considered a "bearer" for such data traffic.

Issues that will have to be sorted include authenticating devices to the AP and integrating them as part of the accounting arrangement used as part of the hotspot's operations. It will also have to include support for situations where two or more devices need to transfer data between each other via the AP such as use of the WiPICS wireless digital-camera tether to dump just-taken pictures straight to a Centrino laptop for immediate review as part of a school photography session. This is important where wireless hotspots are set up to prohibit machine-to-machine data transfer for customer security.

With regards,

Simon Mackay

wirelessoceans
04-06-2005, 10:09 AM
Simon,

I wrote a long response but somehow it did'nt post. In short the "standard" which it is not, will be smart client which is only used/supported by certain aggregators (iPass, Boingo) with specific hardware (Nomadix). If hotspot operators have this capability, which the better quality vendors do, then this may be the answer.

Wireless Isolation or peer to peer blocking is far more beneficial than allowing it for these types of transfers. Generally USB would be the transfer method for this type of exchange and is efficient simple and faster than wi-fi.

Billing is a whole seperate issue by it self, but if smart client is used and its provider has roaming aggrements this can be handle via roaming settlement.

Good questions.

flw
04-21-2005, 09:19 PM
Nutshell version:

USB is easier for most users period and more secure.

WIFI with even basic security beyond the understanding of many (not all) home users and cannot beat a point to point connection for security (USB in this case).

Things are always changing so unless one can truely predict the future of users wants and technology its all a best guess anyway.